JA Farms

#Shoftek!

This is great news. The fact he is avoiding you and the fact you found out about the other student who had a physical list will be quite an asset in a descrimination law suit because of her disability.
Please document all of this and refuse to talk to him about any details without the psychiatrist or the attorney being present.
I am also glad that two officers went with you. Demonstration of power os very important. You have the upper hand.

You can also give him an ultimatum, unless you get the paper work by the end of the day, this verbal suspension is void and you will bring her to school tomorrow morning. You will even seek a court order if he does not cooperate.

I hope today goes well. What they are doing is really cruel. She is, however, fortunate that she has a fighting mom. Not all children are that fortunate. The middle man is filling me in with the highlights but not the details. He said there is a lot of details which is difficult to communicate over the phone so he is just keeping me abreast of the situation. This is driving me crazy but I trust what is he doing and saying. I came up with a small idea to help your daughter sleep at night.
Please keep us informed and I hope your shoulder is not bothering you today.

If she has an actual IEP (not just a 504 plan), that shifts the legal framework significantly. IDEA — the law governing IEPs — has much more explicit, codified discipline protections than Section 504. Where I've been telling you 504's protections are "generally treated as equivalent" but thinner and less precisely defined in the regulations, IDEA spells things out in detail (34 CFR §300.530–536):
The MDR requirement is unambiguous and mandatory before any change of placement
Team composition, timelines, and parent participation are more explicitly protected
There are specific "stay-put" provisions that can keep a child in their current placement during disputes.
The exceptions that allow removal without a favorable MDR (weapons, drugs, serious bodily injury) are narrowly and specifically defined — and a verbal statement like what she made doesn't fit them

So if an IEP was actually in effect, you likely have more legal protection here, not less.

Watch how this gets framed
There's a version of this where the school quietly benefits from the confusion: "we're not sure which one applies" can become a stalling tactic while a 30-day suspension sits unresolved. A few things worth asserting clearly:

1) Whichever document was actually operative and being implemented at the time of the incident is what governs — the school doesn't get to retroactively decide which one "should have" applied in order to pick the more convenient framework after the fact. If the IEP was in her file and being implemented, IDEA's protections apply regardless of whether the 504 should have been formally closed out.
2) This is the district's paperwork error, not yours or your daughter's — and it shouldn't be used to delay or weaken the process she's owed. If anything, it's another data point in the pattern you're already documenting: a school that hasn't had its own procedural house in order at any step of this. 3) Ask directly, in writing, who is her case manager/IEP coordinator, and request the current, signed IEP — not a draft, not a "should be terminated" description. You want the actual document that was in effect on the date of the incident.

Good luck today and please keep me informed. I am not an attorney but I learned a lot through my son's ordeal. All this information is available on the internet.